First LoT book club discussion: Madame Bovary

[wendybeth]

Damned French.

[Not Afraid]

I'm down to the last gritty business (she's taken thw white stuff) but I just could't keep my eyes open last night. After my walks and feeding - and laundry, I'm going to finish it.

[Brigitte]

I'm reading it too, almost done. It's online here with discussion of themes and such as well.

[mistyisjafo]

I finally reached Part III. Sorry this one's a slow read but I'll be done soon enough.

More importantly... What book is next?!

[Not Afraid]

I finished on THursday, but had such an eventful weekend I haven't had much time to post about it.


First of all, the 3 parts of this book are so distinct to me in their style, action and interest. Part one was difficult to get through, while part two was better and part three was damned near exciting!

I've been reading so much contemporary fiction recently that it was difficult for me to "get into" the period of French Enlightment. I probably should've given myself more historical context before reading the book, which would've increased my initial enjoyment of the work. As it was, I didn't do that until afterwards but it helped to put things in place.

I loved Part Three. I thought many of the key scenes were fantasticly written and evoked such visuals. I became one of the townspeople who knew everything that was going on, paid attention with interest, but never discussed openly what was happening in reality. As a result, I never completely identified with any of the characters, not did I actually like them (but I did understand Emma on a certain base level).

The death scene brought to mind scenes from classic gothic novels and the first "encounter" of Leon and Emma was quite humerous. There is some really fantastic writing in Part three.

Although I felt that Emma was not a very rich character, I could relate to her in certain ways. It is very tempting and easy to get caught up in romantic notions of passion and the excitement of the seduction. I could relate to her desire for that ultimate feeling of passion and ecstacy. It can be like heroin, but it is very unrealiztic to expect to stay in that state of mond for an extended period of time. Emma was an addict and, as she got what she desired, she only wanted more. More passion, more money, more attention, more more more. Not very realistic, but I've attempted the same thing at times. So, while I was frustrated with her character, I could see the unhealthyness of her situation as she drifted further and further away from reality.

Charles was someone I wanted to hit upside the head. Even before he met mma, his Mother was making me mad. He was such milch toast that it was frustrating throughout the book.

I find it very interesting that Flaubery was taken to court over the publication of this work (first as a seriel publication of a Parisian journal). From the little I know about French life of that period, what he was describing was not very unusual. What he did that ws unusual was talk about it. I think the "proper" reaction of the time was to pretend these immoral activities didn't exist not to openly discuss it. Not much different than SOP of today in certain sectors.

Interesting read. I'm very glad I read it because I wouldn't have done it on my own.

I will go back and read the comments of others now that I have finished and may comment further if I find something intriguing to comment on.

[wendybeth]

You're right, NA- the 'proper' thing at that time was to overlook such vulgarities, and certainly not write about them- not in mainstream publictions, at any rate. Flaubert's challenge was to write the anti-Romance, which I think he did to great success. Nothing like a little reality to dispel romantic notions.....

Charles was a good man, but lacked any sort of dynamic- he just sort of plods along in life and accepts good fortune and bad with the same passivity. With anyone else he would have lived an average life and died an average death; it was his misfortune to hook up with Emma. (The same goes for her). I might empathise with Emma, but I despised her for the horrible way she treated her daughter. Anyone catch how poor Charles caught the Romance bug once Emma kicked it? Obsessing over her things, wanting to build her an elaborate tomb and then finally dying of a broken heart.

The very end of the book made me laugh- Homais finally weasels his way into getting the medal. Isn't that the way life is?

[€uroMeinke]

What struck me about Charles is he seemed to show more affection for Emma in death than he ever seemed to do in life.

I was also interested in seeing how the Townsfolk all just take advantage of the situation. The Music Teacher collecting fees for services never rendered but presumed as part of the affair cover-up.

I agree that there was no one you really identified with in this tale, rather you really were playing the role of one of the voyuers of the town - in the know, but keeping discreet.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

What struck me about Charles is he seemed to show more affection for Emma in death than he ever seemed to do in life.

This, to me, showed that he was just as bad as Emma was. They both constructed their own fantasy worlds to live in, and in his, he had a devoted (lovely/kind/etc) wife. Once she was dead it was far easier for him to over-dramatize her supposed qualities.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

This, to me, showed that he was just as bad as Emma was. They both constructed their own fantasy worlds to live in, and in his, he had a devoted (lovely/kind/etc) wife. Once she was dead it was far easier for him to over-dramatize her supposed qualities.

I think this was part of the point of the book - to take a look realistically at the dangers and pitfalls of romaticism. Flaubert demonstrated, through a fictionalized story, what could happen if lives were lead without a good dose or reality. His point was extreme, but I think it had the effect he desired. It certainly was an unusual take on contemporary life.

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

Once she was dead it was far easier for him to over-dramatize her supposed qualities.

But isn't this how it really is? When someone isn't around, our fantasies get to fill in the spaces - for good or bad.

But in Charles' case, it seems his need was to preserve the illusion of a happy marriage lost - to the point of paying out non-existent debts. His denial is so great one wonders if his dispair was casued so much by her betrayal, or rather her inability to be discreet. Certainly in French culture of the time, it was discretion that was valued above all, infidelity seemed an expectation or at least a commonplace enough occurance.